There's an inane amount of talk about liking/hating Obama. What's going on? Is it a struggle over race at some deep psychic level? Is it the media talking about race without talking about race?

More context, from the second article:

What drives [the haters]? Some of it can be attributed to the give-and-take of today’s harsh ideological divide. Some of it can be explained by the way misinformation spreads virally to millions of like-minded people, reinforcing preconceptions. And some of it, I believe, arises out of fears of demographic changes in this country, and out of racism.

It's no accident that the last word of the article is "racism." If you read that paragraph quickly, the impression left in your mind — or maybe not your mind but many minds — is: "What drives [the haters]... blah blah blah blah ... racism!

Race isn't mentioned in the first article, but there's talk of that "it's okay" ad:

Sounding a bit like a sympathetic psychotherapist, a recent Republican National Committee ad acknowledged Americans’ affection for Obama and offered them permission to move on.

“He tried. You tried,” the announcer said. “It’s okay to make a change.”

Many a nice guy has been fired (or transferred or demoted) because he couldn't do the job.

But, like many here, I'm a tad suspicious of the whole "likeability" thing. Not only because the polls quoted are notorious for skewing in favor of the Demos, but what constitutes being likable is such a fuzzy idea for someone you really don't know.

There's an inane amount of talk about liking/hating Obama. What's going on? Is it a struggle over race at some deep psychic level?

IMO it's not so much a struggle over race as it is a struggle over the race card.

It's not so much about racism as it is about the political-rhetorical charge of "racism." It's not deep, it's superficial. Or, deeply superficial.

The Democrats are struggling to maintain the political power of the race card, the power of the formula "if you don't vote for Obama, you're a racist" for the 2012 election. That's what all this talk of liking and disliking Obama is about.

That's why I suspect Obama's vaunted "likability" in the polls is a double-edged sword. The Dems and MSM keep beating Americans over the head with the race card formula. So Americans have figured out a convenient and effective way to defuse it. As rick puts it: "I just love Barack Obama. It's his policies I loathe."

Anything to keep from talking about how terrible the economy is, about the massive tax hikes that await January 1st, about the security leak investigation going on and what is going on with fast and furious investigations. I am surprised they aren't talking about Romney putting his dog in a carrier again.

Anything to deflect attention from his performance as President. Anything to hide how little leadership and courage he has shown on crucial issues. Barack Obama had the ambition to be a great President. The opportunity was there, and the nation would have followed him. Now his ambition is to be a two term president. That's quite a comedown.

My own doubts re: returning Obama to office (forgive me, WaPo, for I have doubted) actually have little to do with Obama at all. You could take any currently prominent Democrat eligible for the job, and given the behavior and stances of the Democrats this past decade or so, I would not vote for them for dogcatcher.

Here's what I don't get: what do the people pushing the blacklash racism meme expect to get out of it? Speaking of deep psychic levels, I think it's that they know Obama sucks and is going to get beaten badly. Therefore, they are -- perhaps consciously, perhaps not -- laying the groundwork for a post-election analysis of why Obama lost.

Why else would you spend so, so much time calling the American people a bunch of racists? That's quite obviously a losing strategy.

Look, you can make fun of Zero. You can make fun of me. You can make fun of Garage(but that's shooting fish in a barrel). But don't you dare make fun of Blazin' Saddles!

These leftist's. They have never been exposed to the story of the boy who cried wolf.

Let's keep them in their ignorance.

The lack of leadership is what the leftist are griping about. He hads 2 years of a super majority government, and all they could do was pass Zerocare. Granted thats bad, but thgink of the wish list these guys have. Hell, they just Scrubbed their sea treaty, and small arms treaty in the UN, because Zero doesn't want that on his record while he's running. Now, even if Zero wins the election(which I don't see happening), he more than likely will be tied to a Republican Sen, and House, with no chance of ratification. They kept asking for more time because the WH is afraid they can't get ratification with THIS Dem Senate. That speaks loudly to what internal polling is showing them.

Nothing has changed about Obama except that more people see through the media narrative now, and what they see makes them hostile at the con job of Obama and his media hoard.

Yes he is likeable. Yes he is a strong leader. BUT he is a liar about every thought and word that passes his lips. And the place he is leading us to is powerless third world poverty under a lawless one man rule...but what a likeable one man he seems to be.

Americans do well ay remembering the Alamo or at remembering Pearl Hharbor as a uniting resolve. We do not do so well at remembering the 99%'s victory over the bourgeoisie and the capitalist running dogs. Obama is leading the wrong country.

Obama should be shown the same level of civility and gracious deference that George W. Bush was shown--no less, and no more.

And really? Doubters? As though the last few years weren't enough to make doubters of us all. Obama's first attempted miracle, to turn debt into prosperity, failed miserably. Next he tried The Insuring of the 30 Million, and that was awful. Now he's treading water rather than walking on it. So, yes, doubters abound. And why bother using race to explain it? Isn't the fact he's a left-wing blowhard reason enough to hate him?

WaPo is a democratic party propaganda organ. They know they're way beyond the point where they can convince people to vote for Obama based on his record, so the best they can hope for now is to try to convince people that they don't really dislike his policies, they've just allowed themselves to succumb to doubleplusungood emotions. There aren't any reasons left that would make people vote FOR the man, but they might still be able to make people think that it's wrong to vote against him.

By the way, am I the only one who thinks it's laughable to talk about people hating Obama without talking about people hating Romney (and his wife, and everybody who shares his beliefs...)?

Penny, what the hell are you talking about? Is it all code to draw attention to Obama's blackness? Are you a racist? No? Well, prove it by chipping in $3 or whatever you can to Obama for America. You'll automatically be entered for a chance to win dinner with Barack, where you can tell him how you think they should rename Crayola's "antique brass" to "Barack-O-Brown."

(P.S. This list of Crayola colors, and the column mentioning when a color had its name changed, offers an interesting take on social and cultural history. Examples: Flesh renamed Peach in 1962; 1990 witnessed several colors change to things like "screamin'" and "outrageous"; Indian Red changed to Chestnut in 1999; Prussian Blue abolished in 1958 and changed to Midnight Blue; August 4th, 1961, saw Half-black change to Black. That last one is peculiar.)

But for me there's not much real animus. I see a guy who's screwin' the pooch in almost everything he does. You don't dislike him--you just don't care one way or the other about him. Lots of incompetent people ultimately get kicked off the bus if you hope to get anything done.

The only racists are the ones who voted for BO. The ones who lied, cheated and stole to install him only depended on this racism. BO was elected largely, probably solely, on his skin color. I see a lot of cognitive dissonance going on now with these racists.

It's not like 'everybody' likes him but as William McKenzie of the Dallas morning News editorial board says 'it is still Obama's race to lose.'* You also might look at Nate Silver at '538 NY Times.' Like the lady said, 'Fasten your seat belts. It's going to be a bumpy ride.'

I don't care what color he is. I care that every word that comes out of his mouth is a lie, even the ones written by gifted speechwriters. I care that he is constantly campaigning and never working, seems to hate the White House itself. I hate the sewer he came from, where his wife gets a cushy job because he's a Senator - and I hate that kind of thing whether it's him and his Chicago cronyist wife, or Pelosi, or any other politician that plays that game while waxing sanctimonious.

I care that he is a partisan animal with no intention of working with anyone on the other side, or of working within the Constitution, and no intention of respecting the balance of power that is what saves our country from an activist in chief.

He can be half purple, half green, half orange, chartreuse, magenta or cornflower blue - I don't care. He is NOT the man to lead this country, and the fate of the world depends on replacing him.

You know I'm not going to pay any more attention to the polls until September, that's when the independents start paying attention then I will too. Until then I will ridicule Obama and laugh at his gaffes.

You know I am going to vote against Obama for a lot of reasons. But this crappy "racism" schtick is almost right at the top. I am completely and utterly sick of the idiotic nonsense that not agreeing with Obama and kissing his ass means you're a racist.

And with this nonsense as a guide I doubt I will ever vote for a black presidential candidate in my life because I never want this crap to deal with again.

All things considered I would like to see Romney start accusing Democrats of racism against him because he's white. That ought to put a twist in their knickers.

"There's an inane amount of talk about liking/hating Obama. What's going on? Is it a struggle over race at some deep psychic level? Is it the media talking about race without talking about race?"

Well, media can't sell Obama to the masses on his poor record, so they are trying to sell him on "likability", or whatever they thing the masses could buy.

I personally never liked Obama. He did so much promisses he knew he can't keep during his 2008 campaign. Add to this absence of any real achievement to speak of, and you get a picture of a person who is way too cynical even for a politician. So what is there to like?

The second article is by Madison's own David Maraniss. His book exposed the fantastic distortions strewn throughout Obama's "biography." Maraniss is apparently feeling guilty now about his impact on the Obama mystique and is now demonizing all who took him at face value by suggesting they are birthers or Obama haters. It is pathetic really. But it is also testimony to the power of ideology. Maraniss wrote a very good book about the 1967 Dow sit-in and a coinciding fire fight in Vietnam. He seems to flirt with a siren called truth in his work. But ideology is his more powerful siren, and perhaps friends and associates in the ideology-encased world he still inhabits. Free David Maraniss.

The Kansas accent thing is indeed weird, as Obama has tried to sell himself as having ties to Kansas (and Indiana!) as if he lived there or visited frequently as a child.It's especially interesting in comparison to Washington, where he did live as an infant. His 2008 campaign never used or exploited that little home tie.

It's funny of Chait to try to make it sound like Obama is indeed from Kansas. It's also funny to talk about Obama using a "black dialect" (which he wasn't here) as if that's an ok and excusable thing, to change your dialect based on your audience.

What is weird to me is that Obama isn't likable at all to me. What is there to like? He is a lazy narcissist who is trying to destroy this country, I think, in memory of his father, and his father's fight against imperialism. Or, something like that.

Just, like I don't think that I would have liked either Carter or Nixon. Neither had a nice personality. I don't think that either could ever see the other side, and understand those views. And, Obama is probably even worse there. Extraordinarily closed minded and ignorant in the way that this country became great.

Indeed, that is one of my biggest complaints. He is not one of us. He doesn't think like an American. He does not share our dreams. He has adapted those of his father, whose dream was tearing down our success. Spread the wealth around to the third world, etc. Americans don't eat dog, and they don't tell everyone that their success was the result of others, and, esp. of the government. This is a country built on the ethos of hard work and risk taking, the sorts of things that he apparently despises.

The "universality" rule at the Olympics means I've gotten to watch a kid swim breaststroke in the prelims for Tonga whose family I knew when I lived there. And I'll get to see a Paranaque City girl swim the 200 meter freestyle for the Philippines. It's the first time either country has ever qualified a swimmer for the Olympics.

Universality works on the same principle as affirmative action. Unless you're a world class swimmer a two or three second difference is imperceptible. Tonga doesn't have an Olympic size swimming pool, but then Olympic size swimming pools don't have undertow.

Obama is NOT eligible (born British of a British subject father-- not natural born). ALL of congress has committed treason in allowing him, the central bankers' boy, to attain the office of President. He was specifically picked to destroy our sovereignty and Constitution. There is no law and no constitution when there is no legal President. That's what the "law prof", if she weren't a fraud, should be talking about.

If you are on the left "Hater" is the new catchall to define anyone with whom you disagree. Or someone who spoils your narrative with some pesky fact. Or quotes what you said word for word if that quote makes you look bad.

My daughter is 18. She will vote in her first election in November. She saw an Obama ad on TV on Friday and said, "Go away! Nothing could make me vote for you. It's your fault I can't find a job!!!"

She thought it was cool in 2009 that he did a bracket show on ESPN. She loves the idea of a White House kitchen garden. But the longer she can't find a job to help pay for college, the less she has "liked" Obama.

Jake Diamond said... Perhaps it would be more tactful to describe Tea Party members as woefully misinformed or, as is often the case, uninformed

Right!

Because it is the Tea Party running around saying unemployment benefits create jobs, gun control reduces crime, Obamacare will reduce health insurance premiums and ensure more people have insurance and all the rest.

That is Obama's job, and he's doing quite well because of an apathetic populace who is looking down at their Chinese slave made Apple phones while their liberty gets stolen away. Obama is not an eligible POTUS and was picked especially to destroy the sovereignty of US citizens.

My guess is that what is happening with Obama is something that will be well familiar to Americans of a particular age group. When affirmative action hit full swing and companies were being shaken down for simple demographic issues, there was a mad rush to recruit and promote blacks. On the bright side, many of them were great performers on the job, but others simply weren't ready or qualified for the position they landed. This led to embarrassed conversations among managers as to what to do about Mr. or Ms. So and So, a really nice person, who really isn't up to the job, but is well, you know. What usually ended up happening was that Mr. or Ms. So and So would be noisily promoted to a position where less harm could be done to the enterprise. Here in 2012, we have an affirmative action president, a nice person, who really isn't up to the job. Problem is, no place to promote him. I bet he loses big and his likability numbers remain high all the while. Perhaps they will even go up after he loses.

"I bet he loses big and his likability numbers remain high all the while."

I suck at prognostication, but I really doubt that November will turn out to be a blowout either way. In fact, I think it will be pretty close. There are a lot of people in this country who really like their nanny state, perhaps as many as think that Leviathan needs to be cut down.

(1) US Senate: 53 (R) versus 47 (D). I think Manchin will hold his seat in WV, but only by running away from Obama as fast as his legs can carry him. He won't be the only one.

(2) House of Representatives: Not every Republican rookie elected in 2010 will hold his or her seat, but overall I expect the Republicans to go up over 250 seats when the dust has settled. Perhaps that will convince the Democrats to dump Pelosi after the election; but perhaps Democrat politicians are simply ineducable.

(3) Presidential: Despite the best efforts of the press to imply otherwise, we are actually entering another recession -- with L-shaped recovery (meaning no recovery at all) from the one Obama inherited -- and by the 1st Tuesday after the 1st Monday in November everyone will be able to see it whose mind is sufficiently open to see it at all. So I expect Obama to lose by at least 100 electoral votes, maybe more.

Here in 2012, we have an affirmative action president, a nice person, who really isn't up to the job. Problem is, no place to promote him.

Not true. If anybody in his inner circle actually cared about this country, they'd convince him that all of humanity would be better served if he set aside our provincial concerns and took over the leadership of the UN. Of course, if anybody in his inner circle actually cared about this country, they wouldn't be in his inner circle.

When I saw a couple days ago, "He tried, you tried..." I thought it sounded condescending and could be taken as racist because he wouldn't say that to a white opponent. In other words, by pulling his punches it indicates a delicacy about referring to a black man unable to hack it, which can be construed as racist. Ya know?

"Therefore, they are -- perhaps consciously, perhaps not -- laying the groundwork for a post-election analysis of why Obama lost."

I get this sense too, 7M. Of course, now that Obama is the "First Gay President," they can attribute his electoral defeat not just to racism, but homophobia too.

"And really? Doubters? As though the last few years weren't enough to make doubters of us all."

Heh Coketown, and wow, I hadn't noticed the crazy weirdness of equating "doubters and haters"! As if any politician in existence were not to be doubted! So now even "doubting" Obama is a pathological psychological phenomenon to be explained… like "doubting" CAGW is. We're doubters, skeptics, sinners, heretics, sick, madmen all.

Individuals with a deep and abiding prejudice are struggling to redeem themselves. They thought submitting themselves to an object of their prejudice would be sufficient to bring them peace-of-mind; but, instead, it only served to confirm their prejudice.

I wonder how many people voted contrary to their principles, hoping that skin color would camouflage the contradictions.

deborah, I don't think Romney (e.g. in other ads, and in what he's saying on the campaign trail) is pulling his punches. He's hitting hard.

That particular ad is in a way "pulling its punches," but NB at least one pro-Obama pundit has called it the "most dangerous" ad: that's because it's addressing a particular kind of 2008 Obama voter who's disappointed with Obama and might vote against Obama but is still susceptible to the race card (and/ or still nostalgic for the 2008 idealism of "Hope and Change").

A race card which, through the DNC and MSM, is out in full force, as these articles demonstrate. Obama 2012 can't very well run on "Hope and Change."

deborah said...When I saw a couple days ago, "He tried, you tried..." I thought it sounded condescending and could be taken as racist because he wouldn't say that to a white opponent. In other words, by pulling his punches it indicates a delicacy about referring to a black man unable to hack it, which can be construed as racist. Ya know?

And you know this would never be used against a white candidate HOW, exactly?

You are falling into the trap the Dems are using: anything said against Obama is racist on its face because he is black and any criticism of a black is racist.

You see blacks can't be looked at as 'human' first, they need to be looked at as 'black' first. And through that lens EVERY criticism, disagreement or different viewpoint is inherently racist, regardless of the person is doing.

Funny, but that doesn't necessarily hold with 'hispanics' or Asians or Europeans or, in some cases, black Africans that have moved to the US.

The true racists are the people and the Democrat party that view blacks as being too stupid and/or childish to be treated like thinking adults.

Born British of a British subject father, and may still be British. Nope, not a natural born Citizen.

"The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners". 88 US 162, 167 (1874)